2016 and 2017 CSI Trends and Forecasts

Community Investment
and Development
Trends - 2015/2016
Forecasts - 2017
REANA ROSSOUW –
NEXT GENERATION CONSULTANTS:

Who we are:
 Next Generation Consultants helps organisations to become more
sustainable.
 In the community/social investment and development sectors - we provide
consulting and advisory, research and engagement, training and
facilitation, impact assessment and due diligence services.
 We have developed the Investment Impact Index™ - a methodology that
measures the impact and return on investment of
community/social/enterprise investments.
 We are recognised as industry/subject experts and thought leaders within
the sustainable/ social / community development sectors.
 We work across Africa in various development and investment sectors.
Please see: http://www.slideshare.net/Reana1/measuring-impact-and-return-on-investment-of-corporate-social-investment-and-
community-development AND http://www.slideshare.net/Reana1/evidence-of-impact-and-return-on-investment
2016/05/05Next Generation Consultants
2

Background:
 Our vision
 To continuously contribute to increased socio economic impact and ensure enhanced value
and sustainability for all stakeholders across the continent
 Our Context for the trend report
 Global research – both developed and developing countries with a specific focus on
continental and regional trends
 Local interpretation – considering emerging and global best practice and combining it with
indigenous insight and knowledge
 Research methodology – country visits, literature reviews, personal interviews with key
influencers and recognised leaders, focus groups with intermediaries and beneficiaries,
internet (crowdsourced) surveys
 Benchmarked
 Our Investment Impact Index (III)™ also informs our trend report. The III consists the
outcomes of our impact assessments which have considered over R3 billion worth of social
/ community / enterprise investments.
 Our assessments includes evaluating more than 600 programs; across 15 focus/investment areas;
identifying more than15 dimensions of impact and 15 dimensions of return; culminating in a indicator
library with more than 5000 indicators.*
3
Please see our 2016 – Evidence of Impact presentation for the latest information of the III.

To recap: 2013/2014 Trends
 A brave new world - Evidence of collaboration
 Flipsides of the coin - Increased giving/increased
expectations
 Lean and mean - Impact and outcome of the recession
 The next BIG thing - ESG, Impact Investment, Shared
Value, SED, Social Entrepreneurship
 The war on ideas - The growth of flagship/signature
programs
 Green/Blue is the new black - The rise of
environmental funding/programs
 Alphabet Soup - The rise of governance and
compliance
 New Age Stuff - SET committees, Baseline Studies,
Human Rights based funding, Engagement, new
guidelines and frameworks
 Hindsight is perfect sight - Spectacular failures, theory
of change vs theory of practice vs theory of
grantmaking
 Dangerous half truths - Poverty alleviation vs Poverty
reduction vs Poverty eradication
 Fixation on Numbers - Overemphasis on quantitative
impact
 Dichotomies - Scalability vs focus, replicability vs results,
responsiveness vs responsibility
 Keeping up with the Jones’s - New vs old
investment/development models
 Volunteerism is cool - Growth in
employee/customer/supplier/network involvement
 Please give that man a fish - The end of cliché’s
 I know what you did last summer - Community activism
 Local is lekker - Local heroes/local place based
development
 Status quo is not an option - Failure of current M & E
practices
 A horse-A horse for my kingdom - Ethical grantmaking
on the rise/decline
 Two hills ahead
 What we know vs what we don’t know
 What we say vs what we do
Please see: http://www.slideshare.net/Reana1/csi-professionals-briefing-2014-trends
4

To recap: 2014/2015 Trends
 Cross Roads or Tipping Point
 Between the rock and hard place –
budget cuts, program cuts, resource
cuts, new competitors, legislation
and compliance
 The good, the bad and the ugly
 The Good - Sweet spot – integrating
economic, environmental, social
development
 The Bad – unsuccessful development
models, lack of engagement, lack of
evidence (impact)
 The ugly – discriminatory, unethical
funding, failed programs
 It’s all about business - The business of funding vs the
business of development
 It is not business as usual - Accountability,
transparency, governance and compliance dominates
 Heightened focus on performance – Pay for success.
Proof: Demonstrate impact, return, successful,
measurable, meaningful
 Growing focus on issue based funding - Holistic,
integrated, systemic/sustainable development
 Creating shared value - The business of business vs the
business of development
 Follow the plan - Youth development plan, skills
development plan, infrastructure development plan,
local economic development plan, national
development plan
Please see: http://www.slideshare.net/Reana1/2015-trends-and-forecasts-corporate-social-investment-and-community-development
5

What's new: 2016/2017 Trends
 The importance of dealing with the impact
of climate change has to be factored into
investment portfolio’s
 Environmental investment and
development portfolio’s has become more
important
 Ignore the youth at your own peril – the
rise and rise in importance of skills
development and job creation
 Don’t forget to align to the SDG’s – it
provides not only baselines but also
measurable indicators to measure
progress against
 The time for new development and
financing models is here – and very few
funders and development organisations
are ready for the change.
 Governance, compliance, reporting and
risk management is equally important for
all stakeholders and actors in the sector
 Measurement and Engagement are non
negotiable and not even up for
discussion/debate
 Reconsider, recreate, refocus, realign – the
evidence suggest we are getting worse –
not better.
6

What is evident:
More of the same
won’t be good
enough
What is required:
New thinking –
new models –
new knowledge
2015/2016:
THINGS ARE NOT
CHANGING
THINGS ARE NOT
CHANGING FAST
ENOUGH
THINGS DON’T HAVE THE
IMPACT ENVISAGED
7

Global Megatrends affecting development:
ClimateChangeandresourcescarcity
As the world becomes more
populous, urbanized and
prosperous, demand for
energy, food and water will
rise, but the Earth has a finite
amount of natural resources
that can be used to satisfy
this demand.
Demographicandsocialchange
Adding another billion
people by 2025 – making the
total estimate 9 billion.
At the same time, people live
longer and have fewer
children (in developed
countries)
In developing countries the
youth bulge will continue to
be challenges for
governments
RapidUrbanisation
The rise and prominence of
cities in the global economy
has been unprecedented.
50% of the worlds
population lives in cities.
Shiftsinglobalpower
The growth in the
developing (BRICS) nations
and the opportunities of
purchasing power will
contribute to a growing
middle class.
In 2015 Asia already had
more purchasing power than
Europe and America
combined
Technologicaladvances
Technology is one of the
biggest (ever) disrupting
forces. Globally, economies
and businesses are reshaped.
The growth of ordinary
citizens using technology to
make their world better is
the biggest influence on
development
8

Impact of Global Mega Trends:
 Global institutions no longer fit for purpose
 Business, government, civil society want more socially
responsible/inclusive models of investment, development,
governance and economic policy
 The world is becoming hyper connected
 The power of individuals as a virtual citizen is on the rise
 Interest is growing in the importance of a values based culture in
society
 Ethics, transparency, and accountability is of great importance in
business/development models
 There is profound public pressure – and increasingly an economic
argument to pressing challenges of inequality
 The issues of diversity, equality and inclusivity is rising in
importance across all sectors
 Significant demographic shifts are underway which have yet to be
factored into economic, political and social systems
 Dealing with the youth bulge, young vs old populations, job
opportunities and unemployment of the youth are the most
important global issues – which is also linked to education, skills
and employment strategies of both government, private and public
sectors
 Widening trust deficit towards institutions and between sectors
 Transparency and accountability are the two most critical
aspects for all institutions and prerequisites therefore for
collaboration and partnerships
 Government facing fiscal pressures are scaling back social
service provision
 The impact (and expectations) therefore on the investment and
development sectors are huge and increasing
 Private sector players (donors) are increasingly developing
strategies to address collectively economic, social and
environmental challenges to deliver shared value for all
stakeholders
 The development sector (civil society) therefore needs to be
able to provide and show expertise in all aspects of economic,
social and environmental development
 New patterns on economic and political power are creating
shifts in the axis of development
 North vs South and East vs West Africa is challenged by
geopolitical and economic shifts
 Foreign Direct Investment in emerging economies are changing
and shifting dramatically from aid to trade
 China’s economic and political investment in Africa is not
evident in social or environmental development
2016/05/05
9
Next Generation Consultants

Global Perspectives:
 Global funders believe the over-arching issue
for them in 2016 will be global instability,
driving conflict and terrorism, the reality of
millions of refugees, and an ever more
restrictive environment in which they work.
 Trend forecasters predict that this year will be
a year in which fear and anxiety compete with
vitality and innovation as the dominant trends.
 There is evidence that most grantmakers have
a clear idea that the immediate crisis and
humanitarian needs of refugees are best
handled by governments and international
institutions, and that the niche for donors is to
address the longer term problems of
integration, and the host population’s attitudes
to new arrivals, expressed in suspicion,
hostility, xenophobia, and violence.
 Insecurity and fear (Panama papers) - (hostility and
terrorism) driving are driving policy and continues to
exert a dramatic impact on cross border funding, not
just in the human rights field but also in the
development, environmental and humanitarian sectors.
This is seriously affecting the day-to-day business of
grant-makers.
 Additionally climate change is also influencing how
grant-makers understand their role.
 Different issues and causes will impact grantmakers
differently. The biggest disrupters are:
 The struggle/quest for impact
 Greater access to reliable information and new digital
architecture which on the one hand has reduced the time
and costs of collaboration, and, on the other, compacts have
broken down across all countries.
 The premise that funders would take risks and catalyse new
models of development which governments would then pick
up and roll out through policy, no longer exists.
Please See: 2016 Ariadne Forecast for European Social Change and Human Rights Funders
10

Africa Trends:
 Funding for Africa jumped between 2002 and 2014.
 The Gates Foundation dominated funding, but other foundations also increased support.
 Africa-focused grant dollars jumped more than 400 percent, from $288.8 million to nearly $1.5 billion, during this period, while total international giving rose
185 percent. As a result, Africa accounted for 25 percent of international grant dollars in 2014, up from 14 percent in 2002.
 The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which ranks by far the largest funder, accounted for most of the increase in Africa-focused funding since the
early years of the last decade.
 In 2002, the Gates Foundation awarded 30 grants totalling $69.1 million with a focus on Africa. By 2014, its commitment to Africa had risen to 249 grants
totalling over $1 billion. However, the Gates Foundation was far from the only factor driving the growth in giving focused on Africa. In fact, excluding Gates,
Africa-focused giving grew more than 90 percent, from $219.7 million to $422.1 million.
 Most funding for Africa went to organisations headquartered outside the region. Share of funding targeting organisations headquartered in Africa
declined over past decade.
 Among the reasons for funding via intermediary organisations include: Size of grant, specifically for large grants that require extensive financial and management
capacity, or limitations built into tax status or equivalents. Factors that might lead to directly fund organisations headquartered in Africa include an interest in
addressing issues from a local perspective, a desire to build organisational capacity, and/or an interest in providing funding directly to local groups. Other factors
are new organisational type structures or wide focused organisations such as the Glimmer of Hope Foundation and the Omidyar Network Fund.
 Health captures largest share of Africa focused giving.
 Excluding Gates, International Development and relief funding is the top funding priorities, followed by health (22 percent), education (11 percent), and public
affairs/society benefit (9 percent), which includes grants for public affairs, philanthropy, and general grants to promote civil society. Just over half of the funding
for education focused on higher and graduate education. Based on share of number of grants, which is less affected by large awards or a single funder,
international development and relief captured the largest share of Africa-focused funding, followed by health, education, and human rights funding.
 Funding for Africa prioritizes children and youth and women and girls.
 Most support for Africa funding targeted specific projects - (91 percent). In general, most support is aimed at research, followed by general or unrestricted
support (9 percent).
Please see: Funding for Africa: 2015 Edition: Produced by Foundation Centre
11

South African Perspectives:
 Foreign development agencies
only go where
 They are welcome (foreign
policy, government priorities
and relations), investment
climate
 They can make a difference
(corruption and capacity)
 They are assured of results
(capacitated/networked
organisations and reliable
results (M & E)
 South Africa is losing development funding
12

Changes: The value chain
Government / Development Sector / Private Sector
The unholy tripartite
13

Government:
 The strategic goals of the DSD is:
 Review and reform social welfare services
and financing
 Improve and expand ECD provision
 Deepen social assistance and extend the
scope of the contributory social security
system
 Enhance the capabilities of communities
to achieve sustainable livelihoods and
household food security
 Strengthen coordination, integration,
planning, monitoring and evaluation of
services
 More than half of all households in SA
benefit from government’s social
assistance program
 SA’s social assistance system is one of the largest
in Africa and is government’s most direct means of
combating poverty. Spending accounts to 3% of
GDP and has risen from R118 billion 2014 to R145
billion in 2016.
 The child support and old age grants are the 2
largest programs – constituting about 75% of total
spending.
 Others include the War Veterans, Disability, Grant
in Aid, Foster Child and Care Dependency grants
 The NDA focus on food security, ECD, ED and income
generation programs
 The NYDA focus on national youth services, education
and skills development
Please see: Social Development: Pocket Guide 2014/2015
14

Funders: (corporate and private)
 Changing role of funders - 3 Distinct types of grantmakers are evident:
 Reactive or Demand-led: Funders judge applications on merit and are responsive to demand/applications
 Compensatory of Deficit-led: Strategy based on clear ‘deficiencies’ – issues which may have received little
previous funding – or where there are system breakdowns – i.e. education
 Instrumental or Interventionist: Clear about project intent and impact – funding is aligned with business
strategy.
 Changing focus
 Funding for HIV/Aids – is no longer seen as a disease that kills but instead about getting access to
preventative medicines – this changes dynamics and many funders are pulling out of HIV and health
funding, due to shifting government priorities or failures.
 Equality on grounds of ethnicity is coming back into the spotlight. This is linked to the global migration
issue – and is true in South Africa as well (xenophobia and racism)
 Changing budgets
 A decline in profits – leads to changing priorities – leads to changes in programs and budgets (as well as
outcomes) (in general a decline in sustainable development)
15

The Development Sector: (NGO/NPO’s)
 Faces economic uncertainty – increased volatility and shocks
 Board representation (demographics) is a concern - (youth, diversity, inclusivity)
 Changing relationships and responsibilities between government, private sector and
development sector – i.e. government abdication of service roles, non-payment on
contracts, rise of social/impact investment/bonds contribute to a fragmented, pressured
sector)
 Increasingly competitive environment – (for profit vs not for profit organisations)
 Effectiveness of collaborating in networks are questioned
 Changes in stakeholder (accountability) expectations
 Advocacy – the step child of development – is gaining popularity over program based
organisations
 Changing customer (donor/government) demands and expectations
 Rapid technological changes – social media impacts fundraising
 Demographic shifts – age, gender, race, religion, location (urbanisation)
 Evolving regulatory frameworks – King IV
16

What’s (not)
working?
17

Enough evidence: More of the same is
not good enough
 SILOED RESPONSES and PATCHWORK PROJECTS
 Social impact has been designed and is delivered across multiple departments, sectors and jurisdictions, often without
coordination. Short-term, ‘single-dose’ interventions, annual projects / pilot projects that do not take off and
uncoordinated project funding have led to patchwork responses with little significant impact
 THE DESIGN OF PROGRAMS IS MOSTLY BUDGET-DRIVEN RATHER THAN NEEDS-DRIVEN
 Although differences between funders exist, the vast majority of CSI programs are developed based on the available
budget, rather than what is needed to achieve social objectives or specific development/community needs.
 NON-ENGAGEMENT WITH STAKEHOLDERS
 Programs designed ‘for’ communities dominate the service delivery landscape. Consultation is often the apex of
community engagement, and users of services have little say in the ongoing design, learning and evaluation of
services that, in the end, are about affecting change in their lives
 LACK OF EFFECTIVE MEASUREMENT OF PROGRESS
 Many services/programs are not effectively evaluated, and if they are - the analysis (knowledge) of the impact is not
shared with other service providers or stakeholders. Therefore it is hard to know if and how things are improving, and
it is harder still to learn from failures
18

Let the figures speak:
 Since 1994 – budget spend on social services has increased by 15% from 45% to
60% (of total national budget) - 2014/2015
 Education - accounts for 35% of the social services (budget DOWN from 49%)
 Health - accounts for 21% of the total social services (budget DOWN from 23%)
 Social security - (most of which is social grants – accounts for 30% of total budget) UP
from 21%
 It is predicted that in 2016/2017 18 million people will receive social grants
 In 2009 the number of people in receiving social grants overtook the number of
people employed. In 2013 there were 90 people employed for every 100 people in
receipt of social grants
Please see: Please sir, I want some more … IRR/CRA May 2015 Research
19

Let the evidence speak:
 Education
 85.5% of schools are no-fee schools attended by 73.2% of all pupils
 BUT more than 700 000 pupils drop out of the schooling system per year
 Health
 Very little gains have been made
 Severe malnutrition among under fives (below 60% of expected weight for their age) have come down BUT
40% out of every 1000 children still suffers from severe malnutrition
 The proportion of households with adequate food access has decreased by only by 2%
 Maternal health – in 2014 - 2584 women died in child birth, during pregnancy or during delivery or
termination of pregnancy
 Similarly TB has worsened – the infection rate has doubled since 2012
 HIV/Aids between 2002 and 2014 - the number of people living with HIV increased from 4 to 6 million
 Basic services –
 The number of people receiving free water increased by 53%
 The number of people receiving free electricity increased by 28%
20

Prevailing
Trends:
2013-2016
THE MORE THINGS
CHANGE?
21

Top 3 Trends:
 1. THE RESOURCE SQUEEZE:
 The most prominent trend that began with the Great Recession (2007/2008) will continue its drain in 2016:
scarce financial resources.
 2. THE UPWARD SPIRAL OF NEED:
 The dramatic decline in government funding increased demand for services, as communities and individuals
continue to struggle and look to non-profits to provide basic services.
 This trend continues and is exasperated notwithstanding increased social security spending by government
due to job losses, increased interest rates, increased cost of living, declining FDI, etc.
 The upward spiral of need for basic services is likely only to increase in 2016, while the resources that non-
profits have available to them will continue to be squeezed.
 3. ADVANCING MISSIONS THROUGH ADVOCACY:
 The significance of the first two trends heightens the need for all (both funders and intermediaries) to
advance their missions through advocacy.
 Advocacy is a means to address systemic changes and influence policy.
 It is now recognized and acknowledged that the two greatest barriers to progress are the current government
policy environment and the current economic climate. If non-profits and funders are serious about bringing
things “to scale,” advocacy is how to achieve it.
22

Trends 4 – 6:
 4. INCREASED TRANSPARENCY ABOUT OUTCOMES:
 Because of the intense competition for financial resources, evidence of change and impact is critical as it is important
for all stakeholders in the value chain to be transparent about not only their finances, but also their outcomes and
impact.
 5. OWNING OUR COSTS:
 In 2014, the overhead myth started to burst about how much it really costs to run the operations of a non-profit.
 Similarly in 2015, the real cost of funding and grantmaking came to light because of reporting requirements. (cost of
resources, process, systems, reporting and communication)
 In 2016, we anticipate there will be a growing awareness about the need for both funders and non-profits to know
and really “own” the true costs of meeting their missions.
 Underestimating and under-investing - The old saying “Everything takes longer and costs more than you expect” is
very true when you are trying to drive social change. Yet donors chronically underestimate what it will cost to create
results and, as a result, underinvest in the capacity required to make those results a reality. When organisations receive
less than required to succeed, they underperform.
 6. INCREASED SCRUTINY:
 2016 requires a continued focus on good governance. Considering new Principles and Practices/
Standards/Guidelines/ Frameworks that offer guidance for ethical and accountable governance and financial
practices will require not only risk management, compliance and governance, but strict oversight and scrutiny.
23

Trends 7 – 10:
 7. PICTURES THAT TELL STORIES:
 If 2013 was the year of sustainability reports, 2014 the year of integrated reports and 2015 the year of the infographic, 2016 is
going to be the year of data visualisation. Storytelling with pictures and graphics will increasingly be the way we read and
understand data, so having the ability to communicate effectively with data will be important.
 8. ONLINE EVERYTHING:
 Campaigns going viral (Ice bucket challenge), crowdsourcing (fundraising) a reality, activism a growing phenomenon
(#generation), the growing importance of social media, and an always connected environment.
 This means that funders, non profits and communities need to be aware and knowledgeable. Information and communication
need to be optimised for mobile devises therefore information and communication – and (responsiveness and transparency)
are critical
 9. THE LEADERSHIP/SKILLS CHALLENGE:
 At the core of this trend is the heavy burden placed on all resources/stakeholders to be knowledgeable, skilled, experienced, in
all matters social and developmental. All resources need to be good managers of people, gracious with demanding
stakeholders, tech-wizards, advocates for their missions, equally savvy with legal issues and social media, and at the same time
strategists able to keep their organisation ‘on mission’.
 10. WHAT IS IN A NAME – NEW FINANCING/ ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURES ADD CONFUSION:
 A trend that will become much stronger in 2016 is experimentation with legal structures designed to deliver social good.
 New forms of entities that combine for-profit investments with social benefit objectives. (Social Enterprises)
 Impact investment and the promise of “pay-for-performance” are getting lots of attention, - as are concepts of shared/blended
value – commercially driven social solutions.
24

The big issues:
 What we know:
 We still have not reached pre-2007/2008 funding levels
 Notwithstanding innovation – new models of funding and development – the
number of organisations/projects/programs/communities funded – declined –
meaning there was no leverage of partnerships, collaboration, technology – we are in
decline – all of us
 What we don’t know:
 Where were real change – impact – success – sustainability
 What we don’t know we don’t know:
 Let the statistics/science/evidence speak
 As much as in real life – few tax payers are carrying the rest of society – we see the
same in socio economic development – a few funders contributing more than 75% of
all funding and development
 If the Mining Industry is responsible for more than 50% of all CSI funding – what will happen
when the industry collapse?
 If the economy does not grow – poverty will increase - profitability will be affected – which will
affect grantmaking – a vicious cycle
25

“
”
2016:
Theme of the Year:
Disruptive Development
Fear and anxiety compete with
vitality and innovation as the
dominant trends.
Two contradictory forces drive today’s economy:
One – information is about abundance
Two – sustainability is about scarcity and resilience
26

New Concepts:
 New buzzwords in 2016/2017 to
watch out for:
 Inclusive economy
 Circular economy
 Social capital
 Social value
 Conscious capital/investment
 Collective/social impact
 Old(er) news
 Shared/Blended value
 Social economy
 Social entrepreneurship
 Social innovation
 Impact investment
 New drivers
 The Sustainable Development Goals
 Sustainability and Integrated
Reporting
 The forgotten
 National Development Plan
27

New influences:
 Big Data
 Requiring practitioners to collect, analyse, share,
distribute more robust data – more effectively -
and to use qualitative analysis more intelligently
(not only quantitative data)
 Mission based investing
 Using market based techniques/tactics/ tools to
address specific societal challenges in order to
increase/scale/replicate programs and
interventions to achieve measurable
social/environmental and economic ROI and
impact
 Dealing with the impact of climate change and
the impact thereof on the quality of life of
communities
 Crowdsourcing
 The democratisation of fundraising – everyone
is a funder/philanthropist – but also want to be
involved see/experience what their contribution
achieves
 Human rights lens applied to funding and
development
 Leading issues in development include: Women,
children, people with disability, LGBT, demanding their
human rights to: education, health, water, equality,
housing, basic services, and addressing issues such as
human trafficking, child labour, access to
justice/information/services, etc.
 Youth Bulge
 Africa’s future: Un/under-educated, unemployed,
marginalised, alienated who are so aspiring, socially
conscious, and need to be empowered
 The seven million South Africans between the ages of
16 and 24 who are neither in school nor working and
are in danger of falling through the cracks, with no
pathway out of the educational gap and into the
workforce.
 Persistent issues
 Increased HIV infections, slow/declining economic
growth, limited foreign direct investment, chronic
unemployment, unstable political context, increased
violence and crime, gender inequalities, etc.
28

2016:
Disruptive
Development
WHAT WE KNOW
WHAT WE DON’T KNOW
WHAT WE DON’T KNOW
WE DON’T KNOW
29

Trends 1-4: The obvious
 1. The impact of climate change
 Water, Food, Energy = Blue/Green/Renewable economies
 Retail Sector: Food Security / Supplier Development
 Financial Sector: Negative impact on profits / risk mitigation strategy
 2. Waste is wealth
 Circular economy, inclusive economy/development, shared value
 Aspects of sustainability also becomes risk mitigation strategy
 Mining Sector – Recycling / Beneficiation / Local Content Strategy
 3. Activist youth
 The # generation – Fees must fall/Rhodes must fall/Zuma must fall
 Skills development / bursary programs / tertiary education vs ECD
 4. Link to Global development
 The impact of the SDG’s – leads to a change in funding priorities and focus/investment areas
30

Trends 5-6: The emerging
 5. The era of compliance and governance has arrived:
 International Standards: United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, the United Nations Global
Compact, the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Companies, the IFC Performance Standards for Social
and Environmental Sustainability
 Industry specific Standards: The Extractives Industry Transparency Initiative, The International Council
for Metals and Mines, Better Coal Initiative, the KZN Coal Hub Initiative, The Fossil Fuel Foundation,
New Equator Principles
 South African Legislation: The Constitution, The Mineral and Resources-, Petroleum Acts, The
Mining/Financial/ICT/Retail Charters
 Corporate Governance Frameworks: King IV, The GRI, The IIRC, Accountability 1000SES, The
Companies Act, the JSE-SRI Index, The BBEEE Act, Social and Ethics Committees
 6. The era of reporting has arrived:
 Reporting on input, activities, outputs, impacts (across the value chain) – that contributes to value
generation – not only quantitative outcomes
 The (negative) impact of business being mitigated through social investment
 Carbon offsetting, job creation, skills development, enterprise/supplier development, etc.
 Generation and sharing of energy and water competing with traditional development portfolio’s
31

Trend 8: The hidden
 There is as much difference between qualitative and quantitative impact as
there is between impact and return on investment
 Negative impact, unintended impact and indirect impact is also impact – in
development not all impact is positive – BUT it has never been accounted
for
 Community stakeholders are a critical part of any program yet continue to
be seen as merely ‘recipients/beneficiaries’ of interventions
 Can you prove engagement with stakeholders?
 Can you prove/guarantee scientific/specific outcomes and impact?
 Can you provide evidence of impact/return?
 Is your data assured/verified?
32

What we know:
Funding Sector
 Continues broad focus, multiple focus -
short-term funding/program cycles
 Lack proper measurement and
evaluation tools, processes and
methodologies
 Lack of large scale high impact
programs
 Continues low-level investment in NGO
capacity building
 Limited application of new tools and
innovation in program design or
funding models
 Lack of collaboration
 Lack of communication
Development Sector
 Development lessons, lessons learnt and insights or
low impact development programs are not shared
for risk of future funding
 Interventions are not based on community
engagement/input or scientific research or baseline
data – relevance of programs questioned
 Monitoring and evaluation expertise is not a given
or funded, neither is development not based on
international/ academic/scientific practices
 The sustainability of the development sector
continues to be challenged as funding for core
operational expenses are limited - affecting the
outcome and impact of interventions
33

What we don’t know:
 How to address systemic social issues singularly
 How to ensure/guarantee development models will provide the right
outcomes and impact
 How much resources will be required to affect real change
 The sustainability of non-profit organisations continues to be challenged as
funding for core operations and capacitating is limited. What happens if
the funder disappears? What happens if the community burn down the
project? What are the risks associated per program, organisation,
community, intervention?
 Why is government ‘missing in action’? Not part of discussions, not part of
program implementation, program design or reporting on program
outcomes?
34

Strategic
considerations:
RE-STRATIGISE
RE-CONSIDER
RE-CREATE
36

2016 – Funders:
 Think local first - NDP/IDP/LED/SED/SLP integration and alignment
 Think global second - the SDG’s
 Don’t get confused = shared value is not CSI – blended value is a philosophy
 Social innovation is not another way to make money from ‘the poor at the
bottom of the pyramid’
 Not every NGO is a social enterprise – Funding NGO’s is too limiting – both on
impact and evidence
 Stop delegating responsibility to NGO’s - they cannot save the world in
isolation or change systemic issues singlehandedly
 Advocacy funding must return to investment portfolios in order to affect
systemic change – are you prepared to take the risk?
37

2016 – NGO’s:
The odds are against you:
 If you function on your own, if you pursue strategies that lack the
infrastructure to affect systemic change, the cloud to influence
government, or the scale to achieve national/sustainable impact – or
guaranteed scientific development models - you are not going to make it
 There is no chance/assurance/evidence with all the money in the world or
the most dedicated/hardworking staff – you can save the world with
unscientific, underfunded, non-collaborative and unaccountable
approaches
38

Forecast 1: The obvious – Re-strategise
 Theory of change / theory of practice / theory of grantmaking
 Do you have the knowledge/insight/understanding of complex and
connected/interdependent social issues/systems
 Do you have a theory of development
 Do you have a measurement framework
 Scalability and replicability
 Do you have the resources/competencies required to ensure sustainable
development/outcomes/impact and return
 Have you defined the outcomes of sustainable development
 Collaboration and partnerships
 Are you willing and able to do what it takes to affect real change
 Do you have the courage and are you prepared to take on more risk to ensure
sustainable development
39

Forecast 2: The emerging – Letting Go
 Development cannot happen without:
 Engagement
 Collaboration
 Knowledge
 Stakeholder pressure/expectations will persist and increase
 Performance based trust
 The development sector will have to demonstrate credibility and capability
 The investment sector will be challenged to demonstrate creative and innovative
programs that affect real impact and return
 Community Stakeholders will keep developers and investors accountable and reporting
will drive transparency
40

Forecast 3: The hidden – Re-Creation
 Be ready for:
 Compliance to regulation – be ready to provide evidence
 The importance of monitoring, evaluation and impact assessments cannot be
emphasised enough
 The moral market place – be ready to be exposed
 Ensure governance, compliance, standards, frameworks and guidelines are encapsulated
in risk management strategies
 Consider both competitive and comparative advantages – be ready with new
investment AND development models
 Reconsider your theory of change (what you do/fund) / theory of practice (how you do
it) / theory of grantmaking/development (what you are trying to achieve)
 Community / stakeholder driven development
 Engagement and activism will influence future development agendas – at SHORT notice
– and may/will demand changes to investment/development strategies and portfolios
41

Forecast 4: Re-Consider
 Focus Areas Changes = Fewer
Programmes = Fewer Partners
 From education to skills development to
job creation
 Focus on YOUTH
 Winners and losers: Health, security,
safety, art, sport, housing to more
immediate/urgent issues
 Focus on FOOD, WATER, #issues, climate
related issues
 Investment Changes = Less Funding =
Less Resources – how can you do more
with less
 Focus on integrated development -
ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL and
SOCIO ECONOMIC
 Development Changes = Performance
based Funding = More measurement
and Reporting
 No investment without research or
baseline studies to provide evidence for
impact (guaranteed success)
 No investment without return to provide
shared value for all
 Focus on INDICATORS to measure impact
and return
 Strategic Changes
 Engagement lead development:
 Communities – expressed needs
 Employees – expressed priorities
 Government – expressed expectations
 Fewer focus areas - Fewer long term
programs = Less Cash – More
volunteering and non-cash givingNext Generation Consultants
42

The dichotomy of development
 Change will affect us all
 Fewer programs - Just not enough resources
 Balance between (company) flagship and community needs
 Back to shorter term programs
 Need flexibility – emergency response
 Need evidence – importance of performance to build trust
 Global influence
 Understanding the link between the SDG’s and local development
 Good news – development is aligned – globally and locally
 Bad news – development is influenced by specific issues
 Ugly news – change will affect all of us – we need to ensure that we have the right
resources, knowledge to ensure and affect sustainable development
43

2016/2017:
There is no place left to hide
– whether you are on the
investment or development
side – it does not matter
In the age of transparency –
responsibility is measured by
accountability
Accountability is measured by
performance
Performance measures impact
and change
The circle is complete
44

3 Scenarios to consider:
 If you don’t change direction, you will end up where you are headed.
 1. The Professionalisation Map.
 In this view, grantmaking needs to gets its act together and act like a real profession. It needs
clear standards of ethics and performance, transparent information and widespread knowledge
sharing. Institute these reforms, and development will become not only much more effective; it
will police itself and keep the regulators at bay.
 2. The Social Justice Map.
 In this view, what’s wrong with development is that it isn’t democratic enough. It doesn’t listen to
a wide variety of stakeholders. It doesn’t represent the changing diversity of the African
landscape. It doesn’t target its efforts toward the deep inequalities that allow it to exist in the first
place. Fix these things, and development will be much more accountable. It might even be
transformed.
 3. The Performance Map.
 In this view, development isn’t enough like business. It needs strategies based on value creation
and focused activities, all expressed in clear goals against which performance can be measured. It
needs to borrow tools and techniques from other disciplines/ sectors that will help donors see
themselves as investors, which in turn will encourage them to use their money more effectively
and efficiently in support of social goals.
45

3 New Classifications and not just
focus areas:
 Responsive
 Value: Taking care of communities where you
are – helping to sustain communities for the
immediate and short term, respond to crises,
linked to employee giving and volunteerism.
Broad-based support – demonstrating caring
and responsiveness
 Strategic
 Specific investments/programs to achieve results
aligned with and material to business strategy by
extending expertise and other resources to
achieve a bigger social impact and profile
 Catalytic
 Support for large scale, holistic and integrated
initiatives to meet complex social and business
challenges. Catalysts (interventions) for
transformative social and business innovation to
ensure lasting change i.e. sustainable
outcomes/communities
Catalytic
Strategic
Responsive
46

In Conclusion
47

2016/2017: Trends to Watch:
Funders
 1. Falling trust in grantmaking
 2. Impact investment – evidence of impact is building
 3. Watch out for diversity/equality/ inclusion/inclusive/ human rights based
funding – new portfolio growth at the expense of other portfolio’s
 4. Educational funding needs to change – will funders however change
approaches? Changes from education to skills development to combat youth
unemployment?
 5. Health funding – going nowhere slowly?
 6. Environmental investment and development areas – ready for take off – but
very few programs/initiatives – scientific evidence of change
 7. Big Data – what do you know about it?
 Gather, analyse and synthesize data - Data on gaps, eco systems mapping - Baseline
data – Comparative data - Benchmarking data - Triangulated data
48

2016/2017: Trends to Watch
Development Sector
 1. New opportunities for civic engagement – youth groups, advocacy, green economy, climate
change, entrepreneurship
 2. Increased use of protests, actions, # generation – using technology and social media to gain
support, visibility, action, fundraising
 3. Collaboration, sharing economy and network approach in a resource constraint environment to
scale interventions and geographies
 4. Work harder to dispel the ‘overhead myth’ and focus on fundraising for capacity building and
integrated services
 5. Find new sources of revenue – social entrepreneurship, impact investment, crowdsourcing, viral
marketing campaigns
 6. Be ready to provide evidence of impact – more demand for outcomes requires more due
diligence, information and data management, new competencies and skills – create own theories
of change, provide baseline data, conduct M & E diligently
 7. Learn to advocate for the sector as well - not just causes and projects
 8. Be ready for comparisons and benchmarking – based on science and evidence – outcome and
impact
 9. Become more strategic – both for own organisations and programs – as well as income and
funding/capacity strategies
49

The future: What I know
2.
More giving leads to
greater impact
3.
Greater impact leads to
sustainable development
1.
Measurement leads
to more giving
50

Reana Rossouw
Next Generation
Consultants
• WEBSITE: WWW.NEXTGENERATION.CO.ZA
• LINKEDIN:
HTTPS://WWW.LINKEDIN.COM/COMPANY/NEXT-GENERATION-CONSULTANTS
HTTPS://WWW.LINKEDIN.COM/IN/REANAROSSOUW
• GOOGLE+: TTPS://PLUS.GOOGLE.COM/+REANA ROSSOUW
• PINTEREST: HTTPS://WWW.PINTEREST.COM/REANAROSSOUW/
• FACEBOOK: HTTPS://WWW.FACEBOOK.COM/NEXTGENERATIONCONSULTANTS/
• SLIDESHARE: HTTP://WWW.SLIDESHARE.NET/REANA1

2016 and 2017 CSI Trends and Forecasts

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (14)

Ähnlich wie 2016 and 2017 CSI Trends and Forecasts

Ähnlich wie 2016 and 2017 CSI Trends and Forecasts (20)

Mehr von Next Generation Consultants: Reana Rossouw

Mehr von Next Generation Consultants: Reana Rossouw (9)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

2016 and 2017 CSI Trends and Forecasts